Assistive Technology – Personal Competencies

by Kelli Ralph

To help organize my reflections for this assignment, I utilized the Wisconsin Assistive

Technology Initiative (WATI) Competency Self-Rating graphic organizer, which is available at:

http://www.wati.org/content/supports/free/pdf/CompetencySelfRating.pdf

My completed self-rating matrix is attached as Appendix A. In completing this matrix,

since I presently do not work in an educational setting, for my answers for “Application”, I

answered with respect to my competency in applying my assistive technology (AT) skills in other

course work for my Master’s degree between now and December 2014, as well as during my

Introductory Professional Term (IPT) as a student teacher when I return to complete by Bachelor

of Education (After Degree) at the University of Alberta in January 2015.

Coming into this course, I felt as though I had very little relevant background knowledge

and experience applicable in the area of AT, particularly within an educational setting. What I’ve

learned through the activities and readings for this course is how the diverse knowledge and

experience I bring, both personal and professional, are transferable for the task of AT

assessment and implementation. This assignment in particular has enabled me to appreciate the

level of competency I had coming into this course, and to reflect on my prior experiences and how

the knowledge I gained through these relate to the PSY 576 course material and activities and

have supported the development of my current knowledge and competencies. Completing the

WATI matrix for this reflection also helped me to realize that my current competencies are

actually much broader than I had realized.

The collaborative work I have engaged in for assignment #3 in particular has given me

confidence in my competencies and my personal strengths for the AT assessment, decision-

making and implementation process. Although I do not have much direct experience with

students of diverse needs and abilities, I nonetheless feel I would be able to go into a situation

and contribute as part of a team, comprehend the recommendations of other team members, and

incorporate these into AT assessment, decision-making and implementation. I would feel

1

confident in helping to identify, and in understanding, the needs of a student through my own

observations, and through the observations shared by other team members, and in contributing to

the AT strategy for that student as a team member. I would also feel confident training students

and their support workers and family on how too use AT tools, and identifying and addressing

barriers that would undermine and strengths that would support AT implementation in the

different environments in which the student engages. Additionally, as a pre-service teacher, I now

feel somewhat confident that I could strategize to address the needs of students of diverse

abilities within an inclusion classroom, including identifying students’ needs, and implementing

differentiated instruction and assessment to meet the needs of all students in the classroom.

My primary target for continuing to develop my competencies is to seek opportunities to

gain direct experience engaging with children of differing abilities, whether in or outside an

educational setting. For instance, undertaking volunteer opportunities with a philanthropic

organization, such as Children’s Autism Services of Edmonton, may facilitate this experience.

Additionally, returning to complete my Bachelor of Education degree in 2015 will provide me with

direct classroom experience as a student teacher.

Educational Technology – My Prior Learning and Experience

While I was waiting to be re-admitted to the MAIS program at Athabasca University, I was

accepted into the Bachelor of Education (After Degree) program at the University of Alberta and

began taking courses part-time in September 2012. One of the courses I took was an introductory

course in educational technology, which included some exposure to AT. This class included lab

assignments utilizing Web 2.0 tools, and included a lot of videos, many of which provided

observational exposure to students with differing special needs utilizing AT. Additionally, Alberta

Education presented to the class about inclusive education and universal design learning (UDL),

and Alberta policies aimed at facilitating these.

2

Figure 1. My TPCK Competencies (February 2013)

3

One of the lab assignments was to create a venn diagram depicting my competencies

with respect to ‘teachnology’.1,2,3,4,5

The venn diagram I created to demonstrate my TPCK

competencies at the beginning of that class is shown in Figure 1 above. I should note that this

venn diagram was created prior to the AT exposure I describe above, and does not specifically

incorporate/reflect my competencies regarding AT at that time. It also did not incorporate/reflect

much of my previous experience and knowledge regarding individuals who have special needs

and the use of AT to meet these needs; for instance, my previous work experience in immigration

developing multimedia training and learning materials for English language learners.

Figure 1 includes a description of where my TK and PK intersect, and I indicated my

knowledge with respect to incorporating technology to enhance my students’ learning. Figure 1

also includes a description of where my TK and CK intersect, and I indicated my knowledge with

respect to strategies for using technology to assist in delivering content to my students.

Upon reflection, it seems clear to me that Figure 1 incorporates largely teacher-centre

considerations, rather than student-centred considerations. For instance, I talk about how I can

use technology; I only superficially talk about how to use technology to enhance my students’

learning. I do not talk about how I can use my TK to facilitate my students’ use of technology to

mediate their diverse needs and support their diverse abilities. Through PSYC 576, I feel that my

competencies have expanded to include knowledge and skills with respect to identifying students

who may benefit from the use of AT, and the use of AT in an inclusion classroom including the

use of technology for differentiated instruction and alternative assessment strategies for

assessing student progress and knowledge acquisition. I have updated my venn diagram to

incorporate the knowledge and experience I have acquired through PSYC 576. I have included it

as Figure 2 later in this paper.

1 Teachnology = the incorporation of technology into teaching, adding technological knowledge (TK) to pedagogical

knowledge (PK) and content knowledge (CK), to render PCK as TPCK. 2 The kinds of knowledge by a teacher for competent teaching practice. From Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_Pedagogical_Content_Knowledge 3 Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(4).

4 Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In J. A. Colbert, K. E. Boyd, K. A. Clark, S. Guan, J. B. Harris, M.

A. Kelly & A. D. Thompson (Eds.), Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Educators (pp. 1–29). New York: Routledge. 5 Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge.

Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

4

What is Assistive Technology (AT)?

Through the activities and materials for PSYC 576 and my previous course on

educational technology, I have gained knowledge regarding a variety of AT tool classes, and with

some specific low-, mid- and high-tech AT tools, appropriate for responding to specific needs of

students and the different environments in which they engage. I feel confident that I could define

and describe tool classes, as well as specific tools, to a degree that would be meaningful for team

members in the AT decision-making process. Additionally, I feel confident that I could describe

tool classes and specific tools, as well as how they respond to specific student needs, in an

Individual Education Plan (IEP) and on funding applications.

One of the things I have appreciated most about PSYC 576 is that it has introduced me

to low-tech AT strategies, of which I was previously unaware (or previously would not have

considered to be AT), and when low-tech may be the preferred intervention, particularly if it leads

to appropriate implementation across the different environments in which the student engages

and mitigates AT abandonment. For instance, for a student with a disability impacting his/her fine

motor skills, paper clipping small pieces of foam core to the pages of a book to serve as page

fluffers may be the preferable AT choice compared to an electronic page turner, which may be

expensive, require training, be more difficult in terms of portability, emphasize the student’s

‘differences’ and stigmatize the student in an inclusion classroom, etc.

Inclusion Education Policies and Assistive Technology Services

My present competencies include an understanding of how Alberta Education policies

and initiatives for inclusion and UDL incorporate the principles of IDEA, and how these principles

are being implemented practically in Alberta schools, including AT services. My knowledge of

Alberta policies and initiatives was largely acquired through the previous course I took in

educational technology. Prior to taking PSYC 576, I had no knowledge of IDEA or how Alberta

Education has incorporated its principles.

IDEA (2004) requires AT be made available if required as part of the child’s special

5

education, related services or supplementary aids and services (including academics, as well as

independent living and vocational education); are required to be written into the student’s IEP

(they the IEP team); and must be met by the school district with no cost to the family (including

devices for environments outside of school, such as the student’s home). Required AT services

include, on a case-by-case basis, determining needs and selecting and implementing AT.6 [Mittler

(2007) discuss the implications of the change in terminology between IDEA 1997 and IDEA 2004

regarding wording that every IEP should consider whether the child “needs” assistive technology

(IDEA 2004) vs. “requires” assistive technology (IDEA 1997).]

One of my postings for forum #2 for this class included a description of some of Alberta

Education’s policies and initiatives that align with the principles set out in IDEA, and I will not

repeat these here.7 These are all guided by the principles embodied by Alberta’s Standards for

Special Education Act (amended June 2004)8, which defines:

Inclusion classrooms as the first option for placing students who have special needs,

wherein instruction is designed to support the needs of all students in the classroom;

Assessment as the ongoing process of collecting information across a variety of domains

(including formal and informal assessments) regarding a student’s needs, capacities and

progress in order to develop and implement appropriate programming;

Learning teams as including teachers, parents and other professionals that share

information regarding the student’s educational needs and plans required programming

and services to meet these needs;

Individualized Program Plan (IPP, ~IEP) as a detailed individualized plan to meet a

student’s educational needs, based on diagnostic information; and,

The responsibilities of schools board include collaborating with community members

(including students and their families, community agencies, organizations and

associations, other education authorities, regional health and children’s services

6 From: Mittler, J. (2007). Assistive technology and IDEA. In C. Warger (Ed.), Technology integration: Providing access to

the curriculum for students with disabilities. Arlington, VA: Technology and Media Division (TAM). Retrieved from http://tamcec.org/pdf/AssistiveTech%20and%20IDEA%20Regs.pdf 7 http://kelliralph.wordpress.com/2013/06/23/assistive-technology-in-alberta-schools/

8 http://education.alberta.ca/media/511387/specialed_stds2004.pdf

6

authorities) to meet the needs of the student.

These are consistent with and incorporate the IDEA principles I describe above.

I should note that Alberta Education is in the process of implementing changes to the

delivery of education for students with special needs. In 2008, Alberta Education began a

consultation process throughout the province – Setting the Direction for Special Education in

Alberta – aimed at developing a framework for special education for students K-12. In 2010,

Alberta Education responded by committing to implementing the 12 strategic direction

recommendations stemming from the consultation process.9 This includes Strategic Direction

#7: Increase access to technologies to support the learning of all students.8,10

Overall, the initiative aims to address challenges stemming from the use of medical

models to identify/define disabilities (disability codes) and funding and resources allocated based

on these codes; narrowly defined curriculum and achievements measures which are not designed

for differential instruction and alternative assessment; and localized decision-making which has

lead to inconsistencies throughout the province in terms of the implementation of policies,

procedures, services and supports. The initiative’s primary outcomes are enhancing the capacity

of teachers in meeting the diverse needs of their students in inclusion classrooms (ex. through

implementing differentiated instruction), and facilitating grater collaboration between teachers,

students and their families. Teachers and schools will be supported by learning coaches, which

are experts at inclusion education and building capacity.

One consequence to note, however, is that this initiative may include phasing out the use

of IPPs (IEPs), to be replaced with the Inclusive Education Planning Tool to support teachers’

capacity, with individual goals replaced by supports and strategies matched to the student’s

needs and strengths.11

This change would contravene the specific requirements set out in both

the Standards for Special Education Act as well as IDEA, and seems to be a less student-centred

9 See: http://education.alberta.ca/media/1296998/09545aeugovresponseenglish.pdf and

http://education.alberta.ca/media/1082136/sc_settingthedirection_framework.pdf 10

Government Response: “Government will maximize the power of technology to personalize learning and present material in multiple ways to support the learning of children and youth in an inclusive environment. Government will share relevant learnings derived from innovative projects supported by ministries to enable the provision of supports and services for children and youth and their families (e.g., using videoconferencing to facilitate a meeting of the Learning Team), especially in remote and rural areas.” (pp.

4) 11

http://education.alberta.ca/department/ipr/inclusion/faq.aspx

7

approach (even though there appears to be greater emphasis on student and family

consultation). Since the overall initiative is currently in the pilot stage, it is yet to be seen how the

policy changes will translate in terms of ensuring the needs of individual students are met. Of

note, in March 2013 Alberta Education initiated a review to consider the IPP (IEP) components

and processes, asking stakeholders including students, families, teachers and leaders in the

education sector to share their views via an online survey.12

As a teacher, I will strive to continually develop my capacity and to collaborate with my

students and their families as much as possible, particularly with respect to students who have

special needs and determining strategies for meeting those needs. However, I would want to be

able to rely on direct support from other professionals with specific expertise (occupational

therapists, speech-language pathologists, etc.) as part of the process, and I think having an

IPP/IEP is a critical piece in providing both me (the teacher) and the student with concrete goals

to work towards and helping define strategies for meeting these goals and assessing progress.

The Team Approach & AT Assessment Process

The readings and activities for this class have enabled me to understand the strengths of

the team approach to AT assessment, decision-making and implementation, as well as the role of

individual team members, and how the team approach addresses the principles set out in IDEA. I

have especially gained an appreciation of the importance of including the student and his/her

family as team members. Additionally, I understand some of the pitfalls that can occur when the

team is not inclusive, or when some team members (notably, family members) are not

meaningfully included as team members. When the student’s and family’s knowledge, expertise,

needs, desires, concerns, cultural values and practices, other time commitments, etc. are

overlooked or downplayed, privileging the knowledge and expertise of professionals such as

occupational therapists (OTs) and speech-language pathologists (SLPs), I understand how this

can lead to mismatched AT and ultimately AT abandonment.

12

http://www.teachers.ab.ca/Publications/ATA%20News/Volume%2047%202012-13/Number14/Pages/Alberta-Education-launches-Individualized-Program-Plan-review.aspx

8

For my work for assignment #3, I gained practical experience with facilitating and

integrating contributions and information from different team members across environments into

an AT strategy, utilizing the SETT13

framework. For instance, I gained experience reconciling the

student’s strengths and weaknesses and the recommendations identified by the OT, SLP,

physical therapist (PT) and special education teacher with my own observations and with the

parent’s concerns, needs, desires, etc. for the home and school environments, and selecting AT

options that speak to all of these. After identifying an appropriate AT class, I was able to describe

how the features could address the student’s needs and integrate within each environment, to

recommend specific AT tools (a low-tech tool and a mid-tech tool) to trial, and to describe why I

was recommending these particular tools and how they could incorporate the student’s strengths

and address the student’s needs outlined by each of the team members. I gained experience

facilitating discussion regarding ways in which the use of the tool could be modified (i.e. used

differently than the manufacturer’s intended use) to better support the student across multiple

domains, as well as possible strategies for differentiated instruction and alternative assessment

(for which I additionally drew on the TK and PK I gained from the previous course I took on

educational technology). I also recommended a novel strategy for positing the device in the home

and school environments (requiring minor modifications to each environment) in order to support

a physical developmental need of the child identified by the OC.

Using the SETT framework enabled me to effectively compile and integrate information

contributed by each team member, and I gained an appreciation of how using a framework like

SETT can support the assessment process and identify potential supports and barriers to AT

implementation and acceptance. Additionally, using SETT has helped me to draft an addendum

to the student’s IPP/IEP that identifies AT goals/objectives/tasks that incorporates the functional

goals/objectives/tasks identified by the OT, SLP, PT and special education teacher, and that

includes a description of the AT skills the student is anticipated to acquire in relation to the AT

tools implemented, as well as strategies for evaluating AT progress that are consistent with the

strategies outlined in the original IPP/IEP document.

13

Student, Environments, Tasks and Tools. See: http://www.joyzabala.com/

9

My current work at the University of Alberta involves collaboration with Aboriginal

communities. Through this work, I have developed skills and knowledge with respect to facilitating

knowledge-sharing and collaboration. I found I was able to transfer these skills to the AT

assessment, decision-making and implementation process for my assignment #3 for this course.

Considering AT for a Diversity of Needs

I do not have extensive experience working with students of diverse needs, and feel that

additional direct experiences are needed to further develop my competencies. The child I am

collaborating with for assignment #3 for this course has needs in the domains of expressive and

receptive communication, for which a low-tech and a mid-tech augmentative and alternative

communications (AAC) tool has been selected and implemented. In researching these tools, I

also learned how they are relevant for use with students who have autism, and how they can be

adapted for use by students who are visually impaired. As a participant-observer in this child’s

special needs preschool classroom, I had some exposure to the other students in the class,

including English language learners, students with low hearing / hearing loss, students with a

cognitive disability, students with autism, and students with behavioural and/or social

developmental delays. I had the opportunity to observe low-tech strategies being implemented in

this classroom (ex. contextual picture card supports for situational behaviour), as well as a high-

tech voice amplification system to support the students with low hearing / hearing loss supported

by the use of American Sign Language (ASL).

Prior to taking PSYC 576, I had some experience (via a research project that involved

delivering a health education curriculum enhancement) with children who were experiencing the

effects of fetal alcohol syndrome disorder (FASD), and children who had various learning

disabilities. While this experience occurred within an educational setting (a First Nation Band

operated community school) and involved the use of differentiated instruction and Native

Learning Styles, it did not involve the use of AT. However, reflecting back on that work, and with

what I have learned through PSYC 576, I am confident that, were I to do the project over again, I

could collaborate with the teachers and staff at the school to identify and implement some low-

10

tech strategies (appropriate for all students in the classroom setting) to support student learning

in that project. (Mid- and high-tech options may have been out of reach at this school due to

jurisdictional and funding issues, and socioeconomic issues affecting families in the community).

My prior work experience at an immigration law firm included creating multimedia training

and learning materials for clients who were English language learners. The materials focused on

preparing clients for their screening interview with Immigration Canada (i.e. what the typical

interview questions would be and how to effectively answer these), English language practice,

and settlement issues (obtaining health care insurance cards, driver’s license, enrolling children

in school, grocery shopping, etc.) Part of this involved translating complex information from

Canadian immigration legislation and regulations into lay language for English language learners.

The skills I developed through this work have been transferrable to my research collaborating

with Aboriginal communities, which includes translating complex scientific knowledge into

language and messaging that is meaningful for our Aboriginal partners. These skills have also

been relevant in undertaking assignment #3 for this course.

What I have learned through the materials and activities for PSYC 576 (including the

research for my AT tool review) helped me to learn more about the needs of English language

learners, particularly those within the K-12 sector, and how low-, mid- and high-tech AT can be

utilized to support their language acquisition and their progress through the K-12 curriculum.

Although I do not have extensive experience working with students of diverse needs and

supporting them with AT, I feel the materials in this course and my previous course in educational

technology, in addition to many more supplementary videos I have watched, have allowed me a

degree of observational exposure. For instance, I have watched videos demonstrating the use of

low- and mid-tech head pointers and eye trackers by people with cerebral palsy or ALS, and a

high-tech head-controlled mouse emulator by a person with quadriplegia. I have watched videos

demonstrating pedagogical and AT strategies for supporting students with autism, apraxia or a

cognitive communication disability in their learning, and the use of an iPad in particular.

As part of my previous course on educational technology, I had the opportunity observe

in-person demonstrations of AT devices during a vendor demo day I attended at the University of

11

Alberta. In particular, I observed demonstrations of alternative keyboards and key guards (for

students with low vision, or students who have a disability impacting their fine motor skills);

switches and head pointers (a puff switch for a student who does not have the use of his/her

hands, for instance); non-traditional mouses that could be mounted somewhere more accessible

to the student (on a wheelchair arm, for instance); a head-controlled mouse emulator;

programmable mouses; a handheld magnifier; a touchscreen table that accommodates access

from a wheelchair and does not require one-finger touch (so students with a disability impacting

their fine motor skills could use the touch interface with their whole hand, for instance); software

that utilized visual- and spatial-based learning (appropriate for the strengths of students who have

special needs relating to language and/or reading, but also appropriate for use with the generally

achieving students in the inclusion classroom); and literacy software (for reading comprehension

and composition / writing mechanics, etc., similarly appropriate for supporting students with

special needs relating to language and/or reading).

My AT tool review for PSYC 576 looked at Kurzweil 3000, a text-to-speech class of AT

that supports reading comprehension, composition and studying skills. I gained knowledge with

respect to how this class of AT can be utilized in an inclusion classroom comprising students of

mixed capabilities to support those students with the cognitive capacity to learn at their grade

level, but not the reading or writing capacity. This would include students with dysgraphia or

dyslexia, visually impaired students, students who are English language learners, students who

have attention deficient (hyperactivity) disorder (ADD/ADHD) and students with autism.

Additionally, I learned how this class of AT could support the learning of generally achieving

students who do not have special needs, as well as gifted students, supporting development of

their study skills in particular. One critical thing I learned was the weaknesses of the tool in terms

of students already achieving at grade level, namely that bimodal reading (having the text-to-

speech reader read every word aloud) can impede reading comprehension for these students,

and I learned how to modify use of the tool to address this.

Undertaking the AT tool review enabled me to gain experience with assessing the

features of a tool with consideration of a diversity of student needs and capacities, as well as

12

exposure to how the tool could facilitate differentiated instruction and alternative assessment

strategies. For instance, I gained experience with how AT can be utilized to facilitate computer

and Internet access for visually impaired students, via integration with a Brailler and integration of

a text-to-speech reader that can read the Internet (supplemented by integration with another

device to allow for interaction, ex. clicking on hyperlinks). I feel the experience I gained through

the AT tool review assignment helped me to develop assessment skills that I would be able to

use in evaluating other classes of AT tools, particularly those that would facilitate students with

special needs participating in an inclusion classroom, as well as those that could be utilized with

all students in a classroom.

I feel confident that I would be able to apply my skills and knowledge to identify and

implement tools that are universally accessible to the students in an inclusion classroom, modify

the use of the tools for meeting specific students’ needs, as well as adapt pedagogy to integrate

the use of technology.

I have updated my “teachnology” venn diagram to incorporate my current competencies

relating to AT. See Figure 2, below.

Complementary Personal Strengths & Transferrable Skills

Undertaking this reflection has demonstrated to me the scope of my competencies –

developed through this course and through previous education and work experience – that are

relevant and critical to the AT assessment, decision-making and implementation process. A

description of some of my skills and knowledge is synthesized throughout this paper. In this

section I will describe some additional personal strengths and skills that are relevant and

transferrable to AT strategizing.

My work for assignment #3 helped me to appreciate that my observational skills are quite

well-developed. These are skills I began to develop undertaking activities for undergraduate

social anthropology classes, and which have proven to be transferrable to my work in immigration

for English language learners, my work in knowledge translation for my research projects at the

University of Alberta, and as well for my work on assignments #3.

13

Figure 2. My TPCK Competencies (August 2013)

Skills in discourse analysis and qualitative research developed through my work at the

University of Alberta enable me to identify key messages and themes conveyed through

interviews and conversations. For instance, for assignment #3, from conversations with different

members of the child’s learning and support team at preschool (special needs teacher, OT,

educational assistant, etc.) and with the child’s family, in addition to my interactions with the child,

I was able to identify common messaging and themes with respect to the child’s needs in each

environment, and I was then able to translate these into discussions about an AT strategy to meet

the child’s needs.

14

Much of the work I have done in the past 10 years has involved identifying funding

opportunities, collaborating with stakeholders to develop research objectives and project plans,

and writing grant applications (including budgets and business cases). Some grant applications I

have written were for community and philanthropic organizations/agencies, which have different

criteria than, for instance, the Canadian Institutes of health research (CIHR). I have some

familiarity with AT and special needs funding and resources in Alberta, but feel I will need some

direct practical experience within an educational setting in order to gain true competency in this

area. Nonetheless, I am confident that my skills are transferrable, and that I would be able to

effectively undertake the task of researching and identifying appropriate funding sources and

resources and facilitating access through the writing of funding applications, access requests, etc.

Additionally, through PSYC 576 and the previous course I took on educational technology, I am

familiar with many manufactures and distributors of AT (ex. Aroga, AbleNet, Kurzweil Educational

Systems, Promethean Partner, Bridges Canada), and for my assignment #3 I gained experience

arranging for the purchase of a Dynavox device from a distributor.

My skills in knowledge translation are relevant for translating complex information – such

as legislation requirements, funding eligibility requirements, AT instructions, diagnostic reports,

and information from literature reviews – into lay language for other team members, students and

their families in particular. Additionally, I have experience interpreting and reconciling

community/cultural/traditional knowledge with scientific knowledge for the purpose of developing

project plans that address the needs and desire of the research partners. I believe my knowledge

translation skills will be particularly useful in AT assessment and implementation in relation to

facilitating information-sharing between AT team members (and particularly helping advocate the

needs and desires shared by the student and his/her family), and in providing training for team

members on the use of different AT tools and strategies.

Personal Weaknesses & Objective for Continued Professional Development

Throughout this paper I have generally attempted to focus on describing my experiential

and constructivist learning gained through this course, as well as drawing on the previous course

15

I took in educational technology and other previous experiences working with students/individuals

with special needs. This has helped me to identify areas in which my competencies are lacking,

and to set professional development goals to address these deficiencies.

My experiential and constructivist learning has been supported by the materials and

activities for this course, and have provided me with guidance with respect to issues to consider,

policies and legislation concerning educational supports for students with special needs, diverse

functional and academic needs of students in their different environments, strategies for matching

AT with student needs, utilizing a team approach, and a broad array of low-, mid- and high-tech

AT tools and their uses. I have also benefitted from engaging in the forums with the other

students in this course who work in various professional capacities within educational settings.

Although I have acquired much theoretical knowledge that I feel I would be able to apply,

I feel that true competency (for ‘Application’ or ‘Mastery’, to use terminology from the WATI

matrix, see Appendix 1) will come only when I have the opportunity to gain direct experience in an

educational setting working with students with diverse needs and abilities other than those I

encountered in my work for this course.

To support broader development of my competencies, my goal is to seek further

opportunities for applying my knowledge and engaging with students within an educational

setting. To meet this goal, I intend to inquire about volunteer opportunities with Specialized

Support and Disability Services (SSS) at the University of Alberta, and other opportunities that

may be available within my local school district or with service and philanthropic agencies (such

as the Children’s Ability Fund and the Transitions Early Intervention Program). In particular, I feel

I lack specific competency with respect to students with severe disabilities who require

positioning/seating support. I feel I need to have some direct experience working in conjunction

with a PT, OT and/or rehabilitation therapist (RT) to gain competencies in this area.

I have made a commitment to continue to serve as a resource for the student and family I

am collaborating with for assignment #3 after this course concludes. In terms of professional

development, I feel this will provide me with opportunities to experience and contribute my

knowledge to, for instance, re-programming the mid-tech device to incorporate curriculum

16

progression, identifying gaps where the selected tool falls short of meeting the student’s needs,

implementing scaffolding strategies to support transitioning the child to more complex AT in

higher grades to facilitate computer access, etc.

One ongoing goal for professional development includes prioritizing time to allow myself

to continue reviewing AT tools. This will partly be facilitated through my personal learning network

(PLN) that includes a number of education and technology professionals who blog about

educational and assistive technology and pedagogical strategies that facilitate the incorporation

of these. Additionally, I would seek opportunities for engagement with the Educational

Technology (EdTech) office at the University of Alberta.

A critical professional development goal is to complete my Bachelor of Education (After

Degree) at the University of Alberta once I finish my MAIS degree (estimated completion:

December 2014). This step will enable me to further develop my pedagogical knowledge and

skills, and to gain direct experience applying these in a classroom setting that will likely include

students of mixed abilities.

Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative, 2001 & 2009 1

Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative Competency Self-Rating

Directions: 1. Use the following codes when completing competency:

• P = Where I was three years ago • N = Where I am now • F = Where I want to be in the future

2. Read each competency. After reading a competency, use the above codes (P, N or F) in the columns that best

reflect your status for each time period. The columns are headed: U, Aw, K, Ap, and M. The meanings of these abbreviations are: • U = Unfamiliar. This is new to me. I know nothing about it. I’ve never heard of it. What is it? • Aw = Awareness. I have heard about it, but I don’t know its full scope such as its principles, components,

applications, and modifications. I need information and training. • K = Knowledge. I know enough about this to write or talk about it. For example, I know what it is, but I’m not

ready to use it in my program. I need training, practice and feedback. • Ap = Application. I am able to apply this. For example, I can design, modify and use it in my program. I may need

information and guidance as I modify or apply this in new situations. • M = Mastery. I am ready to work with other people to help them learn this. For example, I feel confident enough

to demonstrate this to others.

3. Select the 10 competencies that are most important to you personally. Indicate them by placing the numbers 1-10 in the last column. Put a “1” after the competency that is most important to you, a “2” after the competency that is second most important to you, etc. Continue until you have indicated the ten competencies that are most important to you.

Example: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 I am (I want to be) able to: 1. Identify important features of augmentative communication (AC) devices. P N F 2 I am (I want to be) able to: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 GENERAL: 1. Define and describe a wide range of Assistive Technology. 2. Define and describe the Assistive Technology (AT) services that are required

under IDEA.

3. Appropriately consider the need for AT for all students with disabilities, not just a select few.

4. Complete an evaluation/assessment of a student (which is focused on the student, the environment and the task) to determine if they could benefit from the use of AT.

5. Write IEP/IFSP goals/objectives as needed to describe the acquisition of AT skills.

6. Arrange the environment for increased participation and communication for all students.

7. Select materials that are more universally accessible for all students. 8. Competently operate a computer. 9. Access AT resources.

P N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

F 4

1

5

6

3

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

P

P

P

P

P

P

PP

Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative, 2001 & 2009 2

GENERAL (continued): U Aw K Ap M Top 10

10. Determine for an individual student when the best intervention is to train a new a skill, teach a compensatory skill, use AT or use a personal assistant.

11. Determine appropriate use of AT as an accommodation or modification in order to participate in standardized testing, including district and state assessments.

WRITING: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 Mechanics of Writing: 12. Identify and use a progression of AT solutions from low- to high-tech for

difficulties in the mechanics of writing.

Computer Access: 13. Determine an effective way for a student to operate/access a computer. 14. Operate/utilize alternative access methods for computers. Composing Written Material: 15. Identify and use a progression of AT solutions from low-to high-tech for

composing written material.

AUGMENTATIVE COMMUNICATION (AC): U Aw K Ap M Top

10 16. Utilize informal assessment techniques (e.g., environmental inventory,

interview, observation) to determine need for AC.

17. Identify important features of AC devices. 18. Match student needs with features of AC devices. 19. Construct/modify simple AC devices. 20. Operate the following: -Simple, low-cost devices -Devices with levels -Devices with icon sequencing -Devices with dynamic display -Devices based on spelling 21. Set realistic goals for a trail period with an AC device. 22. Select appropriate vocabulary to promote communication. 23. Determine the best form of vocabulary representation ( pictures, symbols,

words).

24. Organize vocabulary in a usable system. 25. Determine functional mounting for AC device. 26. When appropriate, interface the AC device with a computer, environmental

control unit, or printer.

27. Train communication partners. Reading: 28. Identify need for and use an array of low-tech solutions to assist with

reading text.

29. Create and use pictures with text to support reading. 30. Use a variety of means to provide spoken text to accompany the printed

words.

Learning/Studying: 31. Develop and use a variety or print and picture schedules. 32. Select and use a variety of aids to locate, highlight and track information.

P N

N

N

NN

N

N

NNN

NNNNNN

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

P

P

PP

P

P

PP

P

PPP

PP

PP

P

PP

P

P

P

P

P

PP

F

F

F

FF

F

F 7

FFF

FFFFFFF

F

FF

F

F

F

F

F

FF

Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative, 2001 & 2009 3

AUGMENTATIVE COMMUNICATION (continued): U Aw K Ap M Top 10

33. Use software to manipulate and organize information. Math: 34. Identify and use a variety of math aids and low-tech AT. 35. Select and use a variety of voice output aids for math operations, such as

counting, measuring, timing and computation.

36. Select and utilize software to provide cuing for appropriate assistance in math operations or computations.

RECREATION AND LEISURE: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 37. Adapt toys and games appropriately. 38. Select and use adapted toys, games and recreational equipment. 39. Select and utilize a variety of AT for access and interaction. 40. Select and utilize software for a variety of recreational activities.

ARTS: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 Art, Music, Dance, Photography: 41. Identify need for and use low- to mid-tech AT for the arts. 42. Identify need for and use software for the arts.

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 43. Select and utilize a variety of low-tech aids to position and stabilize items. 44. Select and utilize adaptive eating utensils and aids. 45. Select and utilize adaptive devices for drinking. 46. Select and utilize adaptive devices for dressing. 47. Select and utilize adaptive devices for hygiene. 48. Select and utilize adaptive bathing devices. 49. Select and utilize adaptive cooking devices. Mobility: 50. Determine when a student may benefit from assisted mobility. 51. Select and utilize low-tech AT for mobility or stabilization. 52. Design/implement a sequenced intervention to teach a student to

operate/utilize an assisted mobility device.

53. Obtain adapted equipment for operating a motor vehicle.

ELECTRONIC AIDS FOR DAILY LIVING: U Aw K Ap M Top 10

54. Identify a student’s need for greater control of their environment. 55. Design opportunities to use electronic aids to daily living and select

appropriate AT.

(continued next page)

P

P

P

PPPP

PP

PPP

PPP

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

N

N

N

NNN

NN

NN

NNNN

N

NN

N

N

N

N

N

F

F

F

FFFF

FF

FFFFFFF

FF

F

F

F

F

Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative, 2001 & 2009 4

ELECTRONIC AIDS FOR DAILY LIVING (continued): U Aw K Ap M Top 10

56. Operate/utilize electronic aids to daily living including: -Switches -Call buttons/devices -Hands-free telephone interfaces -Page turners -Infrared and other mid-tech electronic aids for daily living -Computer-based electronic aids for daily living

SEATING/POSITIONING: U Aw K Ap M Top 10

57. Recognize the impact of seating/positioning on the student’s attention, energy, and ability to access AT devices.

58. Analyze appropriateness of the student’s basic position. 59. Utilize assisted positioning devices. 60. Recognize when AC devices, computers, seating and mobility equipment

need to be integrated.

VISION TECHNOLOGY: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 61. Use low-tech vision aids to enlarge text. 62. Operate/utilize the following for computer input:

-Text-to-speech, screen reader -Screen enlarger/magnification -Braille printer, Braille translation software, refreshable Braille

63. Operate/utilize Braille keyboard and notetakers.

HEARING TECHNOLOGY: U Aw K Ap M Top 10

64. Identify when hearing amplification may be necessary for a student in an educational setting.

65. Operate/utilize assistive technology for: -Telecommunications -Assisted learning -Alerting

VOCATIONAL: U Aw K Ap M Top 10

66. Recognize need for and use AT for general vocational tasks. 67. Create customized jigs or other AT for specific vocational tasks.

TEAM FUNCTIONING: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 68. Understand the roles of individual team members in the evaluation for and

implementation of AT.

69. Utilize an effective team decision-making process to keep our team operating collaboratively and smoothly.

(continued next page)

PPP

PPP

P

P

P

P

PP

PP

P

PP

PP

P

P

P

P

NNN

NNN

N

NN

N

N

NN

NN

FFFFFF

F

FF

F

FFFFFF

F

FFF

FF

F

F 2

N

NN

NN

N

N

Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative, 2001 & 2009 5

FUNDING: U Aw K Ap M Top 10

70. Utilize appropriate AT funding sources for an individual. 71. Write/compile necessary documentation to support funding from third

party payers.

AT SERVICES: U Aw K Ap M Top

10 72. Plan and implement improved AT services in my school district. 73. Train others (parents, support staff, etc.) to operate/utilize specific AT

devices.

74. Train others to adapt curriculum/plan AT use. 75. Adapt, fit, customize, repair AT devices. 76. Coordinate with other agencies, such as vocational, medical, birth to 3,

community and other service providers.

77. Work with the transition team to plan for effective transition of assistive technology to new settings.

P

P 8

9

10

P

P

PP

P

P

N

N

NN

N

N

N

F

F

FF

F

F

F